Re: Latex Project Public License

2002-02-20 Thread Chris Lawrence 
On Feb 19, Alexei Kaminski wrote:
 I am the current maintainer for the package revtex, which is a collection of 
 LaTeX style files to be used in manuscripts submitted for publication in the 
 journals published by the American Physical Society. The license of the 
 upstream version 3.1, which makes the current revtex package, prohibits 
 taking money for the distribution or use of the files except for a nominal 
 charge for copying, etc. It makes the upstream version 3.1 inelegible for 
 debian/main.
 
 Recently, version 4 of the upstream product has been released, under the 
 Latex Project Public License (http://www.latex-project.org/lppl.html). 
 
 My question for debian-legal is: Does the Latex Project Public License satisfy
 the Debian Free Software Guidelines?
 
 My understanding is that in general it does not, due to the clause
 You may not modify in any way a file of The Program that bears a legal 
 notice forbidding modification of that file, but revtex's upstream version 4 
 can still be considered as free since none of its files bears such a notice.

I believe that interpretation is correct; in the same vein, other
licenses (the OPL, for example) have optional clauses that, when not
invoked, pass the DFSG.


Chris
-- 
Chris Lawrence [EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://www.lordsutch.com/chris/

Computer Systems Manager, Physics and Astronomy, Univ. of Mississippi
125B Lewis Hall - 662-915-5765

Re: Latex Project Public License

2002-02-20 Thread Mark Rafn 
On Wed, 20 Feb 2002, Chris Lawrence wrote:

  My understanding is that in general it does not, due to the clause
  You may not modify in any way a file of The Program that bears a legal
  notice forbidding modification of that file, but revtex's upstream version 
  4
  can still be considered as free since none of its files bears such a notice.

 I believe that interpretation is correct; in the same vein, other
 licenses (the OPL, for example) have optional clauses that, when not
 invoked, pass the DFSG.

Yup, the consensus seems to be that unused clauses of a license don't
affect the freedom of the work.  Note that use of such a license DOES
place a higher burden on the packager, as you now need to check each file
in a new version to see if the package has become non-free.  With a
purely free license, you only need check that the license has not
changed.
--
Mark Rafn[EMAIL PROTECTED]http://www.dagon.net/